I actually stayed up waaaay too late last night reading your review of the T3i and reviewing the media. Also the T3i vs D5100.

The DMC-FZ150 video looks better to my eyes on my 1920x1080 Sony Bravia XBR9 I use as a computer monitor.

I was only able to download one image before Flicker went down, but I'll grab them tomorrow. I noted it says it is firmware 0.2. DPReview reshot their in studio set and the high ISO was much better after applying the 1.0 firmware.

Gordon the one other major flaw of the DMC-FZ100 you did not mention was the yellow-brown cast on white person images. In video they look great and in the zoomed boat shot but I think that is all you had. Have you noticed if this flaw is completely illuminated with the DMC-FZ150? In Photos as well?

Gordon - Superb Review indeed! And you 'detail the nitty-gritty' from the interest-angle of the keen Bridge-Zoomers - rarely done elsewhere - and never in such comprehensive detail.

Also - the way you're actually "on-the-ground" testing P&S Video across the resolutions/functions is outstanding. Very "practical terms" informative, and so, very much appreciated...! The FZ150 from those tests and samples shows as being very good on its video modes.

PS:- A pity that you didn't get a Fuji HS10 to Review - your one on the HS20 is very useful. And you do explain the "EXR" functions, as well as the uses of the 16Mpix and 8Mpix modes - which is "very confused", to be polite - in some 'reviews'.

Re Fuji's quoted HS10 (which I have had just over a year) - 10fps Continuous... The HS10 at release had many "Fuji-isms"... Including 'just' doing the claimed 3-5-7-10fps in JPEG - but only about 2.5/4fps in the claimed 3/5fps RAW / RAW+JPEG.

Firmware Update 1.01 fixed a few foibles, but not Continuous. That had to wait for v. 1.02 - which brought the RAW / RAW+JPEG up to the claimed 3/5fps - but had the interesting effect of "jumping" the Continuous JPEG to 3-5-8-12+ fps. Various sites tested the fast end at 12.5 to 13.2 fps.

As only 7 images are Saved in JPEG - at 12+ fps that gives very little time-spread, so isn't too practical... The 8 and 5fps modes at just under and just over a second are more usable.

You mentioned the HS20's Twist-Zoom... The HS10 lens and zoom are the same - ideal for still images - but "jerk-o-matic" for video - quite awful!

Yes, the firmware tested was v0.2, but Panasonic was happy for me to evaluate this as final. That said, it's always best to use the latest versions and now v1.0 is available,Ii will be using it for future comparisons with the FZ150.

I'll also try and reshoot my high ISO noise sequence and sample images page with v1.0 firmware this week if the weather co-operates.

Glad you're finding the review useful. I was really impressed with the FZ150, and if the firmware update improves the quality, then that's even better...

1. Mic jack - One fella bought a 2.5 to 3.5 adapter for his FZ-100 prior to taking a cruise to use with his Rode microphone but found it did not work and was told by a Panasonic represenative after returning that only the Panasonic branded microphone actually worked in the hybrid mic/remote jack. Could you conform that a Rode VideoMic in fact does actually function well with the addition of an 2.5-3.5" adaptor?

2. I have yet to find anyone that has confirmed a intervalometer worked well with the FZ100. If you have one or perhaps get one comped to you from B&H perhaps you could tell us if this unit or any other definitely works well with the FZ-150 in its hybrid mic/remote jack?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Nt ... Search=yes

3. Has the FZ-150 eliminated the FZ-100 tendency to render white people with a yellow-brown cast in photographs?

Thanks for the FZ150 review and going the extra mile of comparing it to the competition. I've noticed that most superzoom comparisons are a bit dated and appreciate that you've taken the FZ150's true competition into account.

I recently nearly purchased the Sony HX100V but passed due to IQ, lack of RAW support [to aid in improving IQ], and lack of a remote trigger. I think the model comparison should note that the FZ150 has a remote trigger option while most others do not.

Back when DPReview posted their samples, I downloaded several and printed them at letter size. I found them a little soft and added roughly the equivalent of 2 steps of in-camera sharpening and got excellent prints. When the new version came along, I downloaded their before and after comparison shots of their studio scene, and found that V1.0 needed less sharpening, had less noise, and smoother flat areas. Quite a significant improvement over V0.2; and particularly so at higher ISO.

Thanks for the update bugbait, I'll add a note about the remote control option.

I'll also try a 2.5mm to 3.5mm converter (if they sell them around here) to see if I can get a Rode mic working with the FZ150.

As for the firmware, camera companies frequently supply gear to be reviewed which may be early in some respect. If the hardware or software isn't representative of the final product they always ask reviewers to note this or even not to write about it at all. However at other times they will say the product supplied can be fully evaluated, and that was the case with the FZ150 supplied to me, even though it was running firmware 0.2. That's why I was happy to review it as it stands.

But I also know you're all keen to see v1 samples and reuslts - as am I - so I'll get to work on this as soon as I can source the update. Speaking of which I couldn't find an update on Panasonic's sites. I'll ask them tomorrow, but in the meantime if any of you have found it, please let me know.

PS - and finally, a big welcome to all the new members here - I hope you have a chance to browse around and enjoy the small but friendly community we have here at cameralabs!

Oh yes I certainly saw the difference in the snow capped range. In the JPG you could tell that is what it was. In the RAW version you could actually start plotting a rescue mission.

I too failed to find the firmware update on any of their support sites or elsewhere. I feel Panasonic has been very sloppy in this. Below I pasted a link to a Ver 0.2 on the left versus - Ver 1.0 firmware comparison. If you mouse over the 3200 below and crop 1 of the woman's face you can easily tell the big diff. But it is evident elsewhere too. When they knew that such was so near completion, this should of been communicated through their marketing department onto key reviewers in each of the dominant languages. Or so it seems to me. I was actually a little perturbed with DPReview because I based my dismissal of the FZ150 on their first set of studio shots and then went on a wild goose chase evaluating a more expensive system and drew conclusion then only to see the 1.0 results from their studio shot being reshot. But this is not the reviewers fault it is the manufacturers. Just plain old bad communication.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1109/11090 ... cfz150.asp

I went looking for the firmware update for you with some creative search technique wanting to be useful. But I too could not find it on their servers nor third part distribution sites. So your call to Panasonic is the best bet. From some of the sample images showing up in users hands we can see some are the very capable .2 and some are the eye popping 1.0. This fella has 1.0.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readf ... d=39492510